Reply To: Elections Aftermath: Was our 2019 Vote & the EU Referendum Rigged? #TORYRIG2019


Home Forums Discussion Forum Elections Aftermath: Was our 2019 Vote & the EU Referendum Rigged? #TORYRIG2019 Reply To: Elections Aftermath: Was our 2019 Vote & the EU Referendum Rigged? #TORYRIG2019

#50834
Kim Sanders-Fisher

Ell – You are doing a great job and I know this is an uphill slog, but it is worthy of your time and attention. Identifying the points of susceptibility in our current Electoral System is incredibly important both to understanding how the 2019 General Election might have been rigged and to prevent the opportunity for any political party to fraudulently rig any vote or referendum in future. What are the key problem areas?

1. Political involvement or conflict of interest by MPs or wealthy influential party members in positions inside such private companies.
2. Market monopoly of the sector by a third party private company, Idox, involved with handling several areas of our voting system.
3. Lack of Watchdog knowledge, access to or oversight of the third party companies used for outsourcing of electoral services.

The undue influence of Tory MP Peter Liley as a non-Executive Director at the Election Management company, Idox, until early 2018 is just one such glaring conflict of interest that should not have been permissible under UK Electoral Law. The fact that Idox is a subsidiary of an Oil and Gas giant openly seeking to expand their area of influence also raises a red flag when opposition progressive parties are dedicated to a low carbon, green agenda that would negatively impact business. This sets the scene for a high degree of justified suspicion especially when the election results are so unfathomable.

An unhealthy monopoly has resulted from this one particular company, Idox, buying out smaller competitors that handled one aspect of the vote and then closing them down within days of the December Election as was the case with Halarose. The awarding of a large contract to revamp the Electoral Register that was not put out to competitive tender, but was allocated to Idox just a couple of months before the Election giving them exclusive access to addresses, names, dates of birth and the unique signatures of most voters throughout the UK. A fraudster couldn’t wish for a better gift, but this in itself is not hard evidence.

Idox also developed a handy Idox Canvassing App which added the voting intention data for all of those on the new Electoral Register they had created. Consolidating so much powerful information in the hands of one unaccountable private company that could not necessarily be trusted to remain impartial, but would not be hampered by any watchdog scrutiny, was extremely reckless. The Electoral Commission have freely admitted in writing that they have no jurisdiction over the private company or companies that a Returning Officer outsources the work to; they don’t even keep a list of which authorities use which companies: this is staggering!

So where to look for hard evidence? After a campaign to boost the number of people using postal votes and the poor timing of the election just as students were on the move, the percentage of postal votes was much higher this time around. It would be helpful to find out what the percentage of postal votes was in this last election. The Idox Postal Vote Managed Service had absolute control of the Idox software designed to assess the validity of your signature and possibly reject your vote on that or other grounds. It was also within the gift of Idox to prioritize, delay, suppress or destroy mailings to meet the desired number of favourable Tory respondents.

We do know that a significant number of Postal Votes did not arrive in time or did not arrive at all; we need to determine if it was reasonable to claim incompetence if the volume of such anomalies is suspicious enough to point to deliberate suppression of the vote. Many of these issues will require a demonstration of the volume of mistakes and errors that simply cannot be accounted for without a very strong suspicion of deliberate intervention. Genuine errors are always random so if a sizable preponderance of unfortunate errors consistently accumulates votes for a Tory candidate at the expense of opposition candidates that, in itself, is highly suspicious.

The deliberate bad timing of the Election meant that there were discrepancies between the original and the new Electoral Register causing fully anticipated confusion on poling day that resulted in numerous registered voters being removed from the register and refused the right to vote; in some places this impacted a large number of voters. People were told they had already voted or that they were registered to vote in a remote location to which they had no connection. How much of this chaos was due to poor management errors? The sheer volume of these anomalies that are being reported on social media goes beyond chronic incompetence to imply vote rigging.

The more data that we can accrue to demonstrate that the sheer volume of anomalies was not within the bounds of reasonable error and that the negative impact disproportionately helped a Tory candidate running in a former Labour stronghold, the stronger the case proving a rigged election becomes. From the plan for a crash-out Brexit to the disastrous mishandling of the Covid 19 outbreak to the “Levelling up” budget that is designed for more “Decimating Down,” we cannot afford to let these Toxic Tories remain in power. Ell – I will post more on where to look for the evidence tomorrow after tracking down a couple of important Links, but for now if you have not done so yet, Please, read, sign, share and Link to this vital Petition: 2019 TORY LANDSLIDE VICTORY DEMANDS URGENT NATIONWIDE INVESTIGATION.